A collective bargaining agreement will not be interpreted to require arbitration of statutory wage and hour claims unless the agreement clearly and unmistakably requires arbitration of those claims.  Here, the CBA did not meet that standard.  It required arbitration of only those issues that the union and employer later agreed to arbitrate.  Also, litigation of the statutory wage and hour claims would not require interpretation of the CBA.  While the CBA and state labor laws covered some of the same issues, such as minimum wage, when overtime pay accrues, and the length of the work day, the CBA set different standards for each of those issues than state law did.  So enforcing the state law standards could be done solely by reference to state law, without considering the parallel CBA provision.  Accordingly, the trial court correctly denied the employer’s motion to compel arbitration.